What is the test for a time limitation defence?

As I have said, I did a step by step analysis with counsel as outlined in Smith v. Clayton, et al, above, and I repeat what was said in that case at p. 165/166: Summary The court may disallow time limitation defence if it appears to be equitable. The court shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case, and in particular the seven statutory factors. In determining whether it is equitable, the court must have regard to the relative degrees of prejudice. However, this cannot mean the determination is based upon relative degrees of prejudice. If that were so, the application would never be denied because the degree of prejudice to the plaintiffs is ultimate, complete, final and absolute. If the application is not granted, the plaintiffs lose their right to claim a remedy or recovery. The best a defendant or other party could hope to establish is a comparable degree of prejudice, namely the inability to advance a defence that would defeat, on the merits, the plaintiffs’ claim, due to the plaintiffs’ delay. If the determination was based upon the relative degree of prejudice, then the application would, in reality, be automatic as the best another party could establish would be a stalemate. What the defendant must establish is a real or serious prejudice to the defendant on the merits which prejudice cannot be compensated for by directions or conditions such as allowing the defence to be struck on the admission of evidence the delay unequivocally would have otherwise caused to be inadmissible. Conclusion